7.  The applicants were born in 1937, 1945 and 1942, respectively. The first and second applicants live in Kaakamo and the third applicant in Kittilä.
8.  The applicants are fishermen operating in the maritime area at the mouth of the Kemi River by the city of Tornio. They fish small fish and rear salmon in private waters in the flow area of the Kemi River. The second applicant fishes also in waters leased from the State.
9.  In 1971 Finland and Sweden concluded the Frontier Rivers Agreement (Suomen ja Ruotsin välinen rajajokisopimus, gränsälvsöverenskommelsen mellan Finland och Sverige; SopS 53-54/1971), which included provisions on the right to fish in the Tornio River and its channels. The Fishing Regulation (kalastussääntö, fiskestadgan) was annexed to the Frontier Rivers Agreement. The Fishing Regulation was amended in 1979 and 1987 whereby the Finnish-Swedish Frontier Rivers Commission (rajajokikomissio, gränsälvskommissionen), established under the Frontier Rivers Agreement, was given the right to preserve certain fish species, or prohibit or restrict fishing using certain equipment or gear, if this was deemed necessary in order to safeguard future fish stocks. The fish to be protected in the area was the wild salmon of Tornio River.
10.  In June 1987 Finland and Sweden decided to discontinue the application of the Fishing Regulation. Subsequently, an Act for the Fishing in the Tornio River Fishing Area (kalastuksesta Tornionjoen kalastusalueella annettu laki; lag om fiske i fiskeområden i Torne älven; 494/1997, “the Tornio Fishing Act”) was passed. According to section 3 of the said Act the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry of Finland (“the Ministry”) was authorised to restrict fishing, inter alia, if this was deemed necessary in order to safeguard future fish stocks.
11.  By virtue of the Tornio Fishing Act, the Ministry issued Decision no. 496/1997 (“the 1997 Decision”), prohibiting all salmon and trout fishing throughout the year and all fishing with stationary gear during the period from 1 May until 5 July. The restrictions extended to the maritime area of the Kemi River belonging to the city of Tornio, i.e. the fishing waters used by the applicants.
12.  The local fishing association of Kaakamo–Ruottala challenged the lawfulness of the 1997 Decision before the Supreme Administrative Court (korkein hallinto-oikeus, högsta förvaltningsdomstolen). In its judgment of 15 January 1999, the court declined to examine the merits of the appeal, finding that the 1997 Decision was not in the nature of an administrative decision resolving or dismissing a case and subject to appeal.
13.  By Decision no. 319/1998 (“the 1998 Decision”), the Ministry continued the fishing prohibition and restriction.
14.  Despite the above-mentioned decisions, the applicants continued fishing using stationary gear. They considered the decisions unlawful as, in their view, there were only implanted salmon in their fishing waters.
15.  On an unspecified date the public prosecutor brought charges against the applicants for breaching the Tornio Fishing Act. On 21 December 2001 the Tornio District Court (käräjäoikeus, tingsrätten) dismissed the charges, ruling that the 1998 Decision violated the applicants' constitutional right to the peaceful enjoyment of their possessions as wild salmon existed only accidentally in their fishing waters. Thus the 1998 Decision was contrary to the Tornio Fishing Act and the Constitution. By virtue of section 107 of the Constitution, the 1997 Decision should not have been applied.
16.  On 16 May 2002, the Ministry continued the fishing prohibition and restriction, (no. 369/2002; “the 2002 Decision”), however allowing professional fishermen to fish with stationary gear salmon and whitefish between 3 July and 15 September and trout between 3 July and 31 August.
17.  Following an appeal by the public prosecutor, the Rovaniemi Court of Appeal (hovioikeus, hovrätten) quashed the decision of the District Court by its judgment of 28 June 2002, finding that the applicants had breached the Tornio Fishing Act and ordered each of them to pay 20 day-fines.
18.  The applicants sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court (korkein oikeus, högsta domstolen), which was refused on 11 June 2003.